...What does the writer think support end means? Microsoft bricks the PC as soon as the support period ends?
They're going to just keep using Windows 10, security be damned. Probably a good number of users who weren't keeping their PC up to date even when Microsoft was forcing updates on them.
You're...just objectively wrong then. A Hat in Time was one of the best platformers released in the past 10 years, and even if you don't like it you can't base the entire genre on your own opinion.
From what i'm gathering your issue is less that the genre is bad and more that there aren't a lot of "dark, gritty, realistic" platformers...which...there never was.
Like unless PS2 somehow had literally all of them *you haven't given examples other than ratchet and clank) You got Sonic and Mario in early 3D, Banjo Kazooie and DK 64 at the peak of early 3D, conker's bad fur day which is dark but also extremely cartoony...
Then you got platformers like Okami which again...cartoony. Goemon's 3D platformers and thats all cartoon
Like I'm basically trying to say more games in the platformer genre were cartoony than not throughout 3D platformer history and we need more examples of what you really mean
But like you're basically making a claim the entire genre currently is bad over an opinion of something that was never really that common to begin with.
edit: I even tried looking up platformers on PS2 and was greeted with Sly2, Rayman (did that have a 3d platformer?), psyconauts, Spongebob: BFBB
Like great games yeah, but the thing you're basing the entire topic on really seems to be a minority if your issue is a particular art style....
I mean, I won't say everything is better, but it's not exactly as bad as you're saying either.
Sure, 1000s of games are bad. 1000s of games were bad in the 90s and 2000s too. Bugsby 3D was allowed to exist.
OP isn't even able to say games back in the day were good as he has already bashed N64 and Gamecube (lame move btw, Goemon's Great Adventure I still play every year). He's very much just thinking of PS2.
How many people have missed out on Hat In time exactly?
How much money do you pay to login to Mozilla/Chrome/Edge to make this post?
Various PC games before and after Xbox do not charge anything just to be online. it's not an outright requirement. To add consoles usually restrict internet entirely, which is a completely different thing from hosting rounds.
Your second sentence is closer to what the actual reason is, and goes more in line with rockslayer's post.
edit: I will concede that browsers aren't locked anymore behind the payment models it seems. But I will still stand by that everyone is arguing as if individual games don't have to do this, but i'm fairly certain still that no P2P or just outright free online games exist on consoles, which makes the argument moot.
That's not moving goalposts, you're just arguing semantics. People generally think of eliminate when they say prevent in this kind of conversation....
If anything if they went "prevention" and not "eliminate" like in your sense...it would be even dumber because it would just make the steamdeck a more restrictive x86-processor computer compared to the systems people were already comparing it to up until it's release
Imagine how it would've gone down if people were saying "Of course you can do that, it's a PC" if people responded with "Yeah, except it's 10x harder to do things you could normally do on PC". They wanted it to be close to how a PC is, it was part of the advertising campaign.
And if you're going to flaunt your title you should probably actually...you know...say something that pertains to that knowledge you have.
This just seems like blind fanboyism. As great as the steamdeck is there's no reason to act like it's doing things it's not actually doing. It was designed the way it was because it had to be, there doesn't need to be anything whimsical about it.
No they couldn't, it's fucking Linux. They'd have to tie the controller drivers hostage to "lock it down", and at that point they'd hit so many hiccups with legitimate users.
Like they'd have to pull so many things from Linux (in particular Proton) to "DRM-ify" the steamdeck.
And as I think someone else just posted, some of the stuff they'd need to lock-down aren't even things Valve has control over. Like I said Proton but Valve doesn't own proton.